AEGIS Europe and Plastics Recyclers Europe call for swift and effective actions to secure the future of EU industry
/Brussels, 29 October 2025. As the European Union faces growing global competition, European producers already face several trade challenges, including high production costs (especially energy), global overcapacities, and aggressive third-country industrial policies.
Market performance indicators reveal a decline in competitiveness in the last ten years. This is evident in reduced production across sectors such as steel, silicon, ferroalloys, aluminium, and paper & board. Additionally, exports have dropped significantly in sectors like finished steel, man made fibres, and paper & board. Increased energy prices also play a role, but the real problem is the dumping of excess capacities on the open EU market and the need for new approaches to deal with industrial subsidies in addressing these overcapacities.
We are losing manufacturing jobs at an alarming rate. In AEGIS Europe sectors alone, approximately 34,000 direct jobs have been lost compared to the pre-COVID period. Considering that each direct job loss triggers 3-4 indirect job losses, this amounts to around 100,000 total jobs lost.
Since the 2008-2009 financial crisis, the situation has worsened, with 2.5 million industrial jobs disappearing and numerous plants across Europe shutting down. A wave of closures has been rolling out across the EU, mainly in the automotive sector and energy-intensive industries, but also in green tech sectors such as batteries. These closures are occurring throughout the EU.
Against this backdrop, and a year after the publication of the Draghi Report, AEGIS Europe, together with Plastics Recyclers Europe, calls on the EU to:
1. Strengthen and expedite the use of Trade Defence Instruments (TDIs) to timely protect EU industry from unfair foreign practices:
Injury Margin: WTO law does not provide for injury margins; thus, the EU has full discretion in determining the calculation method. The current methodology does not account for the volumes of imports or potential volumes. Therefore, factors such as the actual market share of imports and potential market share (due to overcapacities) can be legally used to increase the injury margin.
Dumping Margin: The normal value in the country of origin is compared to the export price to the EU, subject to a fair comparison. If the export price to the EU reflects a higher price due to social and environmental costs borne in the EU, an adjustment should be made to increase the margin by subtracting these costs from the export price. Both changes do not require an amendment to the basic Anti-Dumping Regulation.
Small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), often the most harmed by unfair trade, are effectively excluded from investigations due to the heavy data-gathering burden. While DG TRADE has set up an SME Helpdesk, it must be empowered to support enterprises in collecting data and completing injury questionnaires. Legally, injury evaluations for SMEs do not have to follow the same standards as those for large enterprises.
Address energy subsidies: Energy has a big share in the cost of production of key industries in the Union. While EU industries have been affected by an increase of energy costs, notably due to Russian’s invasion of Ukraine, third countries which have subsidised energy have been able to unfairly take market shares from EU industries. Consideration must be given to taking action, both in the WTO and in domestic Anti-Subsidy actions, to counter these massive subsidies which can be considered Specific in that they apply to fossil fuels only.
2. Upgrade the toolbox of EU industries by optimizing old instruments or designing new ones, such as an overcapacities instrument:
We call for an instrument that: i) must not be limited to the steel sector; ii) is available independent of the Safeguard instrument. Iii) can be triggered by the EU industry, to avoid political interferences. The instrument must allow the imposition of punitive tariffs, or any equivalent measure, at the border, on goods sourced in third countries which have given support directly or indirectly to the rise of economically irrational overcapacities.
3. The Foreign Subsidies Regulation represents an important trade autonomous tool to protect the European Industry’s competitiveness and ensure a level playing field on the Single Market. In recent years, there has been an increasing influx of subsidised bidders from State-owned economic operators from third countries: this unfair situation can lead to a loss of market share and deindustrialisation of the EU, as well as having negative effects on competition in the Single Market. Ahead of the publication of the EC guidelines in 2026, and the deadline for the regulation’s evaluation, we call for key improvements such as:
Thresholds: The threshold of EUR 250 million for public procurement is high and fails to capture many important projects, for example in the construction or rail supply industries.
Withdrawing bidders: It should not be permitted, in case of recurrent suspicions of unduly advantageous tenders, that bidders withdrawing from a procedure to avoid redressive measures can again bid in another procedure unless they have proven that they do not benefit from distortive subsidies.
Nature of bidders: The shareholders’ structure of bidders should be checked and go beyond a mere declaration, in order to avoid participation from State-owned enterprises in bids.
Reduction of the administrative burden for European companies which are equally concerned by the reporting obligations stemming from the Regulation.